In 2000-2003, LHL reduce the retrenchment benefits of workers
from the usual practice of 1 month per year of service to just
nothing. LHL has explained that this is done for the OVERALL GOOD
of Singapore Workers.
He has clearly explained that if such termination benefits are not
reduced and removed, the employer will have little incentive to
hire people and hence there will be no jobs in Singapore. You have
to ponder hard about this LOGIC, because it is reasoned by our
elite leaders. If such benefits are taken away, McDonalds will not
even set up in Singapore.
Now with such benefits removed, our dear leaders have created so
many jobs by attracting many MNC. That is a real demonstration of
genius by our beloved leader. However, not many people appreciate
the beauty of the PAP's thinking..
Oct 1, 2005
Is it common for companies to sack older workers
I had been a loyal employee of McDonald's Singapore for the past 22
years and had risen from a Trainee Manager to Senior
Restaurateur.
I had a reasonably good performance record over these years. In the
past 12 months, my performance rating was excellent.
Recently, I was shocked to find myself given a Notice of
Termination and was told to leave the company immediately without
being given any reason.
I was given one month's pay in lieu of notice. I have to admit I
had been naive to believe that a company needs to have reasonable
cause to ask an employee to leave.
I subsequently wrote to the company to find out the reason for my
termination, whether it was due to non-performance or something
that I might have done that warranted such an action.
The reply I received was that 'contractually for termination of
service or resignation from employment, either party is required to
give one month's notice in writing or make payment of one month's
salary in lieu thereof'.
So it had complied with the contractual obligations. This means
that legally, it can terminate any employee's service anytime
without having to give any reason.
In the past when McDonald's Singapore was a franchise, it showed
compassion when it retrenched its employees, unless it was a case
of dismissal.
It appears that McDonald's Singapore today, now owned by McDonald's
Corporation in USA, would not hesitate to make use of a termination
notice to remove its employees.
Employees are regarded as valuable assets for a company but if this
is how valuable assets are treated, employees need to be wary of
their vulnerability. This serves as a wakeup call.
I write to find out if this has become a common practice in other
companies in Singapore, whether they have used this method to
terminate the services of their old employees.
If there are others who face a similar predicament, perhaps they
can write to share their experience. We can approach the Ministry
of Manpower together to see if management employees can be given
protection from companies which abuse the use of the termination
notice.
Boon Geok Poh (Ms)
